TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the dues of the State departments, including Excise and Revenue, have priority over the debt of a secured creditor in respect of the secured assets.
Analysis: The issue was governed by the Supreme Court's ruling that, prior to insertion of Section 11E of the Central Excise Act, 1944, there was no statutory first charge in favour of excise dues, and that even after insertion of Section 11E, the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 prevail because of its overriding effect. The secured creditor's charge over mortgaged or hypothecated assets was held to rank above the departmental dues, and the earlier contrary action of the authorities could not stand.
Conclusion: The priority lies in favour of the secured creditor, not the State departments.
TaxTMI 
